illil I 



' 



I ! ! ' 
ill 



mm 



m^lmmmWmii 






nun )! inuiim 



aMsas 



I illil I II 



Hi 



HilllHHI iU linill ilHIli H i HtlulHliniHHillinilui itU 




sXs^a 



Book^ 4Ma_ 



^"^ 






EARLY OPPOSITION TO 
THOMAS HART BENTON 



By C. H. McCLURE 

Professor of History 
Warrensburg (Mo.) State Normal School 




Published by 

The State Historical Society of Missouri 

Reprinted from 

The Missouri Historical Review 

Vol. lo. No. 3 (April, 1916) 

COLUMBIA, MISSOURI 
1916 



5340 



K) 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS 
HART BENTON. 



C. H. McCLURE. 



In February, 1850, Thomas Hart Benton was defeated 
for reelection to the Senate of the United States. The con- 
test in which Benton lost his seat in the Senate has several 
characteristics which make it stand out prominently in the 
history of the State and of the Nation. The passage of the 
Jackson resolutions marks a definite time at which the con- 
test seemed to begin. Two questions which later became of 
great significance to the entire nation — the right of Congress 
to prohibit slavery in a territory, and disunion — were the 
issues. The struggle was marked by one of the most spec- 
tacular and vindictive speaking campaigns in our history. 
The apparent suddenness, the later significance of the issues 
involved, and the spectacular nature of the contest seem to 
have satisfied all investigators that the overthrow of Benton 
was to be attributed entirely to this contest and the issues 
involved in it. Thus Meigs, Rogers, and Roosevelt, the 
three biographers of Benton, agree that after his first election 
in 1820 he was elected practically without opposition until 
his defeat in 1850;^ while Ray in his ''Repeal of the Missouri 
Compromise'^ places the beginning of the contest in 1844, 

'Meigs, Life of Benton, p. 407f; Rogers, Life of Benton, p. 36; Roosevelt, 
Life of Benton, p. 351. 

■ (151) 



152 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

but assigns the annexation of Texas with special emphasis 
on slavery and disunion as the first cause of the Democratic 
schism in Missouri.^ 

The purpose of this study is to find the real beginnings 
of the opposition to Benton which culminated in his over- 
throw; also to find the beginnings of the factions in the 
Democratic party in the State and the issues upon which 
the division was made. The Missouri sources show that 
Benton did have trouble in being reelected in 1844 and that 
there was a serious effort to overthrow him; that the domi- 
nant party began to break into factions long before 1844 and 
that the break came upon the currency question which was 
later allied to certain constitutional problems; and finally 
that the Texas issue was seized upon by the already well 
organized opposition to Benton, and effectively used against 
him. This study attempts to present these developments 
as they arose; first the split upon the currency issue, then the 
constitutional problems which were injected into the contest, 
the alignment of factions in 1842 followed by the open assault 
upon Benton, the contest for the control of party machinery, 
and finally the campaign of 1844 which resulted in the elec- 
tion of Benton. 

BANKING AND CURRENCY IN MISSOURI, 1837-1843. 

The purpose of this study is to describe the opposition 
to Thomas H. Benton which attempted and almost succeeded 
in effecting his overthrow in 1844 on the occasion of his fifth 
and last election to the United States Senate. Banking and 
currency were the chief issues in this fight against Benton. 
Therefore, Benton's policy upon these questions, the local 
Missouri problems connected with them, and the legislation 
and public opinion concerning them must be explained before 
a discussion of the actual fight is attempted. Banking and 
currency were national questions as well as state questions 
and as Benton's chief work was in the United States Senate 
he looked upon these questions from the national viewpoint. 
Among those opposed to the second United States Bank 

'Ray, Repeal of the Alissouri Compromise, pp. 27-71. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 153 

probably Benton was the only leader who had a clear-cut, 
definite, constructive, currency policy. At any rate he had 
such a policy. Benton's plan was to divorce the government 
from all banks, to provide for the deposit of the government 
funds at the mints and in subtreasuries, and to encourage the 
use of hard money in every possible way. He believed that 
small notes banished silver and gold from circulation; that 
they were easily counterfeited and circulated among people 
not skilled in detecting counterfeit; and that they threw 
the burdens and losses of the paper money system occasioned 
by depreciation, upon the laboring and small dealing portion 
of the community, who had no share in the profits of banking 
and should not be made to share its losses.^ 

Benton failed to get his currency plans adopted by the 
United States government and turned to Missouri as a sort 
of experiment station where he could try out his theories of 
currency. His influence in the Missouri General Assembly 
was all powerful,^ and his political friends at Jefferson City 
wrote, at least, a part of his ideas concerning a bank into the 
charter of the Bank of Missouri. One clause prohibited the 
issue of notes of a less denomination than ten dollars. The 
capital stock was to be five million dollars, and one-half was 
to be reserved for the use of the State. The bank was to 
be managed by a president and twelve directors. The presi- 
dent and six of the directors were to be elected by the General 
Assembly every two years.^ The charter provided that the 
bank should furnish the governor a statement of all its affairs 
semi-annually; that the governor should, after the August 
election, appoint a committee of three newly elected members 
of the General Assembly, not stockholders in the bank, who 
should examine the bank and report its general condition to 
the General Assembly when it convened;^ and that either 
house of the General Assembly might appoint a committee 
to investigate the affairs of the bank.^ The charter also 
contained the following clause: "Whenever said bank shall 

'Thirty Years' View, I. p. 158; Meigs, Life of Benton, p. 260. 

•Darby, Personal Recollections, p. 181. 

'Charter of the Bank, Mo. Session Acts, 1836-37, pp. 12-28. 

'Ibid., Sec. 43. 

'76id., Sec. 55. 



154 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

stop specie payment, the charter shall cease and determine; 
and it shall be placed in the hands of trustees appointed by 
the governor to settle the affairs of the bank." From the 
above provisions of the charter of the bank two conclusions 
are evident; first, that the governor and General Assembly 
thru the power to elect ofBcers, require statements and 
appoint investigating committees, could control the general 
policy of the bank; second, that the very existence of the 
bank required that it should not suspend specie payment. 

On the 9th day of October, 1839, the banks of Phila- 
delphia suspended specie payment. They were followed by 
all the banks of the South and West except the Bank of Mis- 
souri. On November 12th the directors of the Bank of 
Missouri met and passed a resolution "That the bank will 
in the future receive from and pay only to individuals her own 
notes and specie or the notes of specie paying banks." ^ 
There was a general movement of specie to the East and the 
notes of the Bank of Missouri together with all the specie 
available were not sufficient to meet any considerable amount 
of the merchants' obligations daily falling due. The notes 
of banks of other states formed the greater part of the local 
currency. By this act of the Bank the notes of all suspended 
banks lost their character as money for the payment of debts. 
Great excitement was aroused among the merchantile and 
industrial classes. The emergency was so great that several 
of the wealthier citizens offered to bind themselves legally 
to indemnify the bank for any loss it might sustain by de- 
preciation of the notes heretofore received, if it would rescind 
its action. The directors of the bank held a meeting but 
determined to adhere to their original action.^ When this 
became known an indignation meeting was called and the 
action of the Bank directors was severely condemned. Reso- 
lutions were adopted recommending that those doing business 
with the Bank withdraw their deposits. As a result many 
of the heaviest depositors withdrew their funds and deposited 
them with some of the insurance companies or other corpora- 
tions. On the opposite side of the Mississippi River and in 

'Scharf, History of St. Louis, p. 1373. 
'Ibid. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 155 

territory commercially tributary to St. Louis were numerous 
banks, practically without restrictions and often disregarding 
those which were provided, issuing a great amount of paper 
currency of all denominations.^^ The inevitable result fol- 
lowed. Small foreign bank notes came in in large quantities. 
Clearly, the commercial needs of St. Louis together with the 
legal restrictions imposed upon and by the Bank of Missouri 
created opportunities for lucrative illegal banking. These op- 
portunities were made use of by the so-called insurance com- 
panies and other corporations of St. Louis, and great quan- 
tities of cheap fluctuating currency were forced into circula- 
tion by these institutions.^^ In the early forties heavy issues 
of shinplasters (warrants issued by an incorporated political 
body, usually a city or county) further complicated the cur- 
rency questions. ^^ There were now so many kinds of paper 
money subject to continual fluctuations that elaborate 
quotations of notes were required, and brokers had a rich 
harvest in negotiating them. The business of these insurance 
companies and brokers was very profitable. They became 
so strong that, it seems, they were enabled largely to control 
the political leaders as well as the press of both political 
parties in the city. In these companies and their following 
is to be found the most determined and deepseated opposition 
to the aggressive hard money legislative program, and es- 
pecially to Benton who was recognized by all as the leader 
of the movement. 

The exclusion from the State of this foreign paper cur- 
rency became the chief object of Benton and his followers in 
Missouri politics. Benton wanted to test his hard money 
theory in Missouri but that was impossible as long as cheap 
paper money from other states could circulate freely. From 
1838 to 1843 at each session of the General Assembly bills 
were introduced for this purpose. The first bill was intro- 
duced by Redman, of Howard county, in 1838. It made the 
passing or receiving of any bank note or paper currency of 
twenty dollars or less (Bank of Missouri notes excepted) a 

'"Knox, History of Banking, pp. 702-747. 
^^Jefferson Inquirer, Dec. 17, 1840. 
"Ibid., Dec. 30, 1841, Feb. 24, 1842. 



156 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

misdemeanor with heavy penalties attached. It also re- 
quired all money brokers or exchange dealers to pay a license 
of $1,000 annually, and subjected them to a fine of $10,000 
for violation of the act. The bill failed to pass.^^ In 1840 
Governor Reynolds in his inaugural address urged the pas- 
sage of such a measure. ^^ Following this recommendation 
Redman introduced another currency bill similar to his former 
one, but without such severe penalties. However, any 
citizen who passed paper currency was liable to the amount 
passed. This bill passed the House but in the Senate was 
postponed until the next Legislature by a majority of one 
vote.^^ In 1842, Houston, of Lincoln County, introduced 
two bills for the purpose of correcting the currency troubles. 
These bills again prohibited the passing of paper currency, 
and any one asking a license for any trade or profession, or 
qualifying for public office was required to take an oath that 
he had not violated this law. These bills were buried in 
committee and in their place two bills were reported back 
by C. F. Jackson. These Jackson bills did not make the 
passing or receiving of paper currency by an ordinary citizen 
unlawful as the previous bills had sought to do. They con- 
fined their penalties to corporations, money lenders, and 
exchange brokers. These bills passed February 17th and 
23rd, 1843.16 

The authorship of or at least the responsibility for these 
bills which he never denied was brought home to Benton 
in the following manner. Edward Bates, ^^ of St. Louis, later 
Attorney General in Lincoln's Cabinet, in answer to a letter 
of inquiry from the Palmyra Whig, wrote that it was generally 
understood that Benton was the author of the Redman bill 
of 1838, but that he had no definite knowledge relative to the 
matter. However, he knew that Benton was the author of 
the Houston bills. Houston had told him that Benton had 
written the bills and that afterwards he (Bates) had seen the 

"Redman bill; Printed in The Missouri Register, Apr. 9, 1844. 
"Inaugural Address, House Journal, 1840, pp. 28-33. 
"Missouri Register, Feb. 25, 1841. 
"Afo. Session Acts, 1842-43. 

^■'Columbia Statesman, Feb. 23, 1844. The letter of Bates is copied from 
the Palmyra Whig. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 157 

original copies in Benton's hand writing in Houston's office 
in Troy. After the appearance of Bates' letter, the Mis- 
sourian, the Benton paper of St. Louis, made the following 
comment: "It is perfectly well known that Col. Benton 
wrote letters and sent drafts of his bills to his friends at 
Jefferson City, to let them see precisely what his ideas were. 
Those letter and bills were not secrets, but were frank and 
free communications, for the inspection of all who chose to 
see them. They were seen and read generally and with 
more or less alteration were adopted and presented by mem- 
bers." These bills were designated as "Bills of Pains and 
Penalties" by the Whig and Anti-Benton, or Soft Demo- 
cratic, press. This expression and "test oathes," referring 
to the oaths required by the Houston bills, became the chief 
campaign slogans of the opposition to Benton. 

CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS. 

The question of currency was the really vital political 
issue upon which the opposition to Benton arose in Missouri. 
Other questions were dragged in, but the real alignment came 
on the currency question. To Benton this was the all im- 
portant question of state policy. His political friends in the 
state government took up his side of the question and fought 
it to a successful conclusion, so far as law was concerned, and 
Benton, no doubt, considered himself under obligation to 
them for doing so. On other questions in which he was not 
personally concerned Benton incurred bitter opposition for 
the sake of his political friends who had aided in securing 
his favorite currency laws. 

These questions were the limitation of the term of judges, 
the reapportionment of representation in the lower house of 
the General Assembly, and the adoption of the district 
system in the election of congressmen. The first two ques- 
tions caused a demand for a constitutional convention. The 
life term of the judiciary was contrary to the ideas of Jack- 
sonian Democracy which demanded that the offices be passed 
around. The constitution created a Supreme Court and gave 
the General Assembly power to create circuit courts, as 
well as inferior courts. The constitution also provided that 



158 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

all judges should be appointed by the governor and should 
hold office for life. The dissatisfaction was chiefly with the 
life term provision. As the judges were all Democrats the 
Whigs were naturally willing to see the life term abolished. 
This argument for a constitutional convention appealed with 
much force to many people. The Democrats tried, too late, 
to amend the constitution and thus remove the question of 
judicial term as a cause for calling a constitutional conven- 
tion. The legislature passed an amendment in 1842 reducing 
the term of the supreme court judges to ten years and all 
others to six years. The amendment contained a clause 
vacating the offices of all judges on the first day of January 
1845.^^ Before the amendment could become a part of the 
constitution it had to be passed again by the legislature of 
1844. As its passage would have given the governor the 
opportunity of immediately filling all judicial offices of the 
State, and thus would have given him a chance to reward his 
political friends, the Hards, the Whigs voted solidly against 
the amendment when it came up for second passage, and it 
failed to receive the necessary two thirds vote.^^ 

A large and growing body of voters were demanding a 
constitutional convention for the purpose of securing a read- 
justment of representation in the General Assembly. The 
constitution of the State contained the following clause: 
"Each county shall have at least one representative but the 
whole number of representatives shall never exceed one hun- 
dred".2° The result of this clause was a growing inequality 
in representation. In 1820 the fifteen counties were repre- 
sented by forty-three members in the House of Representa- 
tives: in sixteen years (1836) the number of counties had 
increased to sixty and the number of representatives to 
ninety-eight. The legislature of 1840-41 increased the 
number of counties to seventy-seven and the number of repre- 
sentatives to one hundred, the constitutional limit. The 
Legislature of 1842-43 created nineteen new counties and as 
each county had to have one representative, the next legis- 

"Laws of Missouri, 1843, p. 9. 

"Mo. House Journal, 1844-45, pp. 296-297; Senate Journal, 1844-45. 
pp. 99f.. 108. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 159 

lature in making the apportionment was compelled to reduce 
all counties to one representative except Platte, which was 
given two, and St. Louis, which was given four. The in- 
equality of representation was now so great that Caldwell 
county with a total population of 1583 had one representative 
while Boone county with a total population of 14,290 had 
only one representative, and St. Louis county with a popula- 
tion of 47,668 had only four, or approximately one repre- 
sentative for each 12,000 persons. This inequality tended to 
become greater as the population of St. Louis increased much 
faster than that of the frontier counties.^^ The older and more 
populous counties were usually Whig. The new counties 
were Democratic. The Whigs of the older counties soon 
saw what must happen to them as the number of counties 
were increased. Therefore, as early as 1832 the Whig mem- 
bers began to fight the creation of new counties.^^ But the 
Democratic majorities in the Legislature together with the 
fact that the new counties were sure to be Democratic made 
their fight a hopeless one from the beginning. 

Upon this question of reapportionment the interests of 
the older and more populous communities caused them to be 
very decidedly in favor of a constitutional convention. The 
frontier counties, however, were afraid a readjustment of 
representation might cause them to be grouped into legis- 
lative districts, and they did not care to lose their individual 
representation. Benton's political success was naturally 
favored by a large Democratic majority in the legislature, 
but there is no evidence that he objected to a constitutional 
convention on the question of reapportionment. 

The constitutional questions had been of sufficient impor- 
tance to cause the proposition of a constitutional convention 
to be submitted to the people in 1835. The act providing 
for this convention made the county the basis of representa- 
tion in the convention. It was so evident that the Democratic 
frontier counties would be in control that the Whigs and more 

'"Constitution of If 20, Art. Ill, Sec. 2. 

"The Census Report of 1S50, p. 655, gives the population of St. Louis 
county 104.978 and Caldwell county 2.176. 
"Jefferson Inquirer, Oct. 26, 1843. 



160 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

populous counties defeated the proposition by a vote of two 
to one."^ The question of a convention continued to be agi- 
tated until the Legislature of 1842-43 again submitted the 
proposition to be voted on at the August election of 1844. 
This act made the senatorial district the basis of representa- 
tion in the convention. Many Democratic leaders who at 
heart were probably opposed to the convention soon saw 
that it would be impossible to defeat it and, therefore, came 
out for it. The friends of Benton were the last to come over 
and there is no evidence that Benton ever favored the con- 
vention. The vote stood 37,426 for, and 13,750 against the 
convention.^* The convention met in the fall of 1845. A 
new constitution was drafted and submitted to the people 
at the general election in 1846. It corrected the problem of 
representation by creating legislative districts of the thinly 
populated counties, but the constitution was rejected by a 
majority of about 10,000. The question of districting the State 
for the purpose of electing members to Congress came to be, 
in its effect upon Benton's career, of equal if not greater im- 
portance than that of a constitutional convention. The 
Whig Congress had passed an act, 1842, regulating the elec- 
tion of congressmen. This act provided that in each state 
the legislature should divide the state into districts for the 
purpose of electing congressmen. Missouri had been electing 
by general ticket. The greater part of the State officers 
and congressmen had been residents of the central part of 
the State. This was the oldest and most thickly settled 
portion of the state (except St. Louis which was a Whig city 
in a Democratic state and did not get many of the state 
officials) and it would naturally be expected to furnish a 
large proportion of the officials. In the central counties the 
sentiment of the Democrats was very strong against the 
district system,^^ but in all the frontier sections every one 
emphatically favored districting the state. There had long 
been a feeling in the border counties that the central part 
of the state was controlling everything and getting all the 

'^Alissouri Intelligencer, Sept. 12, 1835. 
'^Statesman. Nov. 29, 1844. 
"Jefferson Inquirer, Aug. 25, 1842. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 161 

offices. There was good reason for the feeling. The Demo- 
cratic leaders of Howard, Saline, Cooper, and Cole counties 
had already been designated as the "Central Clique" and the 
district question brought the two sections in the Democratic 
party into open conflict. 

These issues of a new constitution and of districting the 
State are of interest in this study because Benton was prac- 
tically compelled to take the unpopular side of both questions. 
His sentiment against paper currency and state banks of 
issue was so strong that upon that question alone, so far as 
his speeches or letters show, he was opposed to calling a con- 
stitutional convention. No doubt his political theories as 
well as his sense of fairness would have caused him to favor 
a convention upon both the question of reapportionment and 
judicial tenure, but he was afraid a convention would do away 
with the constitutional restrictions on banking. In a letter 
to the Democratic Committee of Clay county, dated August 
16, 1843, he said: "The constitution of the state of Missouri 
places some restrictions on the legislative power over the 
creation of banks; they are not sufficient, but few as they are, 
the Paper Money Party are looking to the contingency of a 
state convention to sweep them all away and lay the state 
open to the mad career of free and universal banking." -^ 
This statement indicates that he was opposed to a constitu- 
tional convention and gives his reasons, but there is no evi- 
dence that he actively aided the opposition to a convention. 
The question of districting the State for the purpose of elect- 
ing members to Congress was of greater importance to the 
crowd of politicians who posed as Benton's friends, than the 
question of a constitutional convention. There is no evidence 
that, either from a standpoint of principle or direct personal 
interest, Benton opposed districting the State. In fact, the 
evidence points the other way. Districting as a political 
method was more democratic than the general ticket plan of 
electing congressmen. Benton was a typical western Democrat 
and from principle should have favored the district plan. 
His enemies claimed that he had favored that principle and 

'^'Jefferson Inquirer, Dec. 7, 1844. 



162 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

had changed front. For proof they quoted Benton's report 
of 1826 in favor of choice of Presidential electors by dis- 
tricts.^^ Why, then, did Benton oppose the district system? 
The only reasonable explanation is that he opposed it not 
because of the principle involved or because of his direct 
personal interests (for he could have had none) but because 
of the personal interests of his political associates in Missouri. 
Prominent among these political friends were Minor, Edwards, 
and Price of Cole county; C. F. Jackson, Dr. Scott, Dr. 
Lowery, Redman, and Rawlins of Howard county; Mar- 
maduke and Dr. Penn of Saline county; and Sterling Price 
of Chariton county. All these men lived in the central part 
of the state and if the state were districted would likely be 
thrown into one district and only one of them would have 
opportunity to go to Congress. They therefor opposed the 
district system because of their personal interests. Benton 
was not concerned personally except so far as his interests 
were bound up with those of his political associates, and as 
will be shown later did not come out on the district question 
until he was compelled to do so. 

ORGANIZATION OF FORCES — HARDS AND SOFTS. 

After this analysis of political conditions and issues it is 
possible to discuss the origin and development of the so- 
called "Soft" faction in the Democratic party; a faction at 
first opposing the rigorous restrictions on banking and small 
notes, later advocating constitutional changes, but soon 
developing into the open personal attack on Benton which 
is the subject of this study. After the action of the Bank of 
Missouri of November 12, 1839, refusing to receive or pay 
out the currency of suspended banks, the excitement ran 
high for several days and uncertainty prevailed everywhere. 
The Whig press was especially active in the agitation. The 
Democratic organ. The Argus, sustained the Bank in its 
action. The Bank was a partisan institution. Its president 
and the directors appointed by the State, who were in the 
majority, were all Democrats, elected by a Democratic legis- 

■'■''Diirly Years' View, Vol. I, pp. 78-80. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 163 

lature, and naturally felt in some degree responsible to the 
body which elected them. One of these directors, A. R. 
Corbin, was proprietor of The Argus. A few days after the 
Bank passed its currency resolution, Corbin sold The Argus 
to A. J. Davis. The Argus continued its policy of defense 
of the Bank's action. Thus the action of the Bank and the 
problems growing out of it were considered by all to be 
political questions. The excitement, uncertainty, and busi- 
ness depression was used by the Whigs as political capital. 

The city election in the spring of 1840 gave the first 
opportunity for the Whigs to turn the popular indignation 
against the Bank to political advantage. For two months 
preceding the election The Republican (Whig) attacked the 
Democratic party almost daily on some phase of the currency 
question. The Redman bill was declared to be the issue of 
the contest in the city election .^^ One editorial said, "Re- 
member that Col. Benton is determined to pass his currency 
bill at the next session of the legislature" and then proceeded 
to advocate the election of a City Attorney who would not 
enforce its provisions. The Democrats conducted an active 
campaign in defense of the Bank and against depreciated 
currency. John Smith, President of the Bank, took a 
prominent part. It was during this campaign before the 
city election of 1840, that the first defection from the Demo- 
cratic ranks was noticeable. Mr. B. Lawhead, a well known 
Democrat, addressed a Whig meeting. Discussing his defec- 
tion The Republican said, "But a short time since he was the 
main pillar of the administration. He was the owner and 
chief support of The Argus, and has probably rendered the 
administration more service than any other individual 
citizen. He has come boldly out against the measures of 
his party." ^^ 

By May 1840 enough Democrats were dissatisfied with 
the currency policy of the party to form a faction and hold 
public meetings. At one of the meetings of the "Softs," 
the "Hards" turned out in force. Lawhead and Wm. P. 
Darnes spoke for the Softs, and Riley and Trotter for the 

»St. Louis Republican, jNIarch 13, 1840. 
"St. Louis Republican, Mar. 25, 1840. 



164 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

Hards. Thos. B. Hudson, who had been the Democratic 
candidate for City Attorney, refused to respond. The Argus 
refused to publish the proceedings of the meeting, but made 
a personal attack on Darnes.^" Darnes met Davis, the pro- 
prietor of The Argus, on the street and killed him. For the 
deed he was fined $500. Soon after Davis' death, A. B. 
Corbin became proprietor of The Argus for the second time. 
In the summer of 1840 when Benton returned from Wash- 
ington he seems to have taken some part in the discussion 
of local political affairs. The Republican said, "The Colonel 
finds, 'city expenditure, additional courthouses, spurious 
banking, small notes' and last but not least 'recreant Demo- 
crats.' The burden of his song relates to city expenditures 
and unconstitutional, spurious banking which is carried on 
within the city." ^^ The above expressions appear to have 
been taken from a speech which Benton made just before his 
departure, according to the Republican, "for the upper 
country for the purpose of winding up the legislature for 
another year, should it not be incompatible with his other 
engagements." ^- Benton arrived at Jefferson City in the 
early part of October and on the 8th addressed a large dele- 
gate convention, the great rally of the presidential campaign. 
This speech was chiefly upon the currency question and was 
one of Benton's greatest speeches upon that subject. Three 
years later when the conflict between the Softs and Hards 
had become well developed this speech was published by the 
Jefferson Inquirer for campaign purposes.^^ Benton said: 
"The currency question is the great question of the age." 
He stated that those who had struck down the second Bank 
of the United States had put in its place the constitutional 
currency, gold and silver; that in order to accomplish this a 
number of acts had been passed, namely: The repeal of the 
act of 1819 against the circulation of foreign silver, the act 
correcting the ratio between silver and gold, the act creating 
branch United States mints, the act which excludes small 

'"Edwards, Great West, pp. 370f. 
''St. Louis Republican, Sept. 30. 1840. 

"Jefferson Inquirer, Aug. 31, 1843. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 165 

notes — all under $20 from the receipts and disbursements 
of the government, and the act creating a United States 
treasury. But yet other measures were necessary to complete 
the great object. One was to suppress all paper money under 
$20. This had been attempted but had not yet been ac- 
complished. He continued : "Let every state suppress within 
its own limits the circulation of all paper under twenty dol- 
lars.^^ I repeat it the currency question is the great question 
of the age, it absorbs and swallows up every other ; the Democ- 
racy must purify and protect it; they must save labor, 
industry, and commerce from the depredations of depreciated 
paper; they must stop the banks from suspending when they 
please and resuming when they please; they must reduce 
corporations as well as individuals to the subordination of 
the law; they must maintain the specie circulation; they 
must do all these things or surrender the government both 
state and federal. They will lose all power if they do not 
and what is more they will deserve to lose it." This speech 
coming as it did just before the meeting of the General 
Assembly, which convened the third Monday in November, 
became the keynote to the policy of the legislature. Col. 
Benton remained in Jefferson City and vicinity until he had 
to start for Washington if he were to get there for the opening 
of Congress. His political opponents claimed that he was 
using undue influence with the legislature, outlining its work, 
and directing its leaders.^^ 

The legislative program upon the currency and related 
problems was quite ambitious. The course of the Bank in 
repudiating the notes of suspended banks was approved by 
resolution, and legislative sanction was also indicated by re- 
electing John Smith president of the Bank.^^ A resolution 
providing for a committee to investigate the business of the 
insurance companies was passed. A law was enacted taxing 
brokers and exchange dealers on all bills, notes, money or 
property handled or held in trust for citizens of other states.^^ 

5*Benton said that individually he preferred to make one hundred dollars 
the limit instead of twenty. 

"St. Louis Republican, Nov. 18, 1840. 
"House Journal. 1840, pp. 116-118. 
"Jefferson Inquirer, Dec. 24, 1840. 



166 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

The Redman currency bill was passed in the House and 
lacked only one vote of passing the Senate. But probably 
the most important of all these measures in its immediate 
effect was the act amending the act of incorporation for St. 
Louis.'^ This act was introduced by Redman, of Howard 
county, and pushed thru over the protest of the delegation 
from St. Louis. This act changed the ward boundary lines 
of the city to favor the Democrats and removed all property 
qualifications for suffrage in city elections. The corre- 
spondent of the St. Louis Republican was expelled from the 
privilege of going within the bar of the House because he had 
condemned the act in strong language.^^ The other city 
papers allowed the Republican to use their correspondence 
and all the papers of the city. Democratic as well as Whig, 
condemned the action of the legislature.^" Thus the an- 
tagonism between St. Louis and the State government was 
intensified and public opinion tended to become unified con- 
cerning all subjects upon which there was a difference of 
opinion between the city interests and the central govern- 
ment. The changes in ward boundaries and the enlarged 
city electorate gave the Democrats a chance in the city 
election of 184 L Corbin, Democrat and editor of The Argus, 
was elected to the city council. The Republican, Whig, 
commenting on Corbin's election, said, "Other circumstances 
than mere party strength elected him and we hope that 
other than mere party considerations will govern his action." *^ 
The Jefferson City Inquirer quoted the above comment and 
said, "Other circumstances had reference to the currency 
problems." *2 

In December, 1840, The Argus began to change front on 
the currency question and was attacked for its desertion of 
Democracy by The Inquirer and the Boonslick Democrat.^^ 
In the editorial discussion which followed it was made clear 
that the St. Louis paper was shifting its position on the 

''Laws of Missouri, 1840-41, pp. 129-141. 
"Sf. Louis Republican, Jan. 11, 1841. 
'"Ibid.. Jan. 12, 1841. 
«'Si. Louis Republican, Apr. 7, 1841. 
"Jefferson Inquirer, Apr. 15, 1841. 
*'Jefferson Inquirer, Dec. 17, 1840. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 167 

currency and banking problem in general. The Argus was 
not alone among St. Louis Democrats in this movement. 
Early in 1841 the directors of the Bank of Missouri rescinded 
the order of November 12, 1839, and from that time on the 
Bank dealt in the paper currency of other banks.^^ The 
attitude of many Democrats in St. Louis was probably like 
that of General Miller, the Democratic postmaster, evidently 
not a man unfriendly to Benton else he could not have held 
that position. When he was removed by the Tyler admin- 
istration in 1841, The Inquirer commented thus, "We are 
not afraid to say that a respectable number of Democrats 
(not oil and water men) were ready to sanction the removal 
of General Miller, not that he was either a drunkard or a 
gambler, but that among other reasons he was suspected of 
being neither a Whig nor a Democrat." ^^ As early as April, 
1841, The Inquirer had suggested the need of another Demo- 
cratic paper in St. Louis, in the following language: "Our 
candid and deliberate opinion is that the Democracy of St. 
Louis and the whole state, owe it to themselves, to establish 
another press in the city." ^^ This suggestion was approved 
by most of the Democratic press of the state. On August 
26, 1841, The Inquirer said, "Altho The Argus hangs on the 
name of Col. Benton, our friends will ere long find, what we 
last winter proclaimed, that he is an enemy in disguise." 
On the other hand The Argus attacked Governor Reynolds, 
Dr. Lowery, The Inquirer, the Boonslick Democrat, and others 
of the "Central Clique." In the fall of 1841 Corbin sold 
The Argus to Shadrick Penn, Jr., who changed its name to 
the Missouri Reporter. Penn was an editor of long experience 
who had moved from Louisville, Kentucky. The Reporter 
was welcomed by the Democratic press of the state, and for a 
time appeared to try to cultivate friendly relations with the 
up-State Democracy and carefully avoided any reference to 
the Central Clique. Penn even went so far as to publicly 
repudiate Corbin who was a candidate for Congress.'*^ The 

"St. Louis Republican. Mar. 13, 1841. 

"Jefferson Inquirer, Jan. 24, 1841. 

"■Ibid., Apr. 8, 1841. 

'^Jefferson Inquirer, Jan. 20, 1842. 

2 



168 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

currency question seemed to drop out of politics so far as 
St. Louis was concerned. Nativism sprang up there. The 
Whig party became hopelessly divided. The Democrats 
carried the city in April 1842, and in August they elected one 
senator and five out of seven representatives to the State 
legislature. Such a victory could be won only by selecting 
men who could be trusted to reflect the popular sentiment 
toward the most vital public question of the day — that of 
banking. In St. Louis that was the side of liberal construc- 
tion of the banking and corporation laws. Evidence that 
these men were liberal in their views on banking and cor- 
porations is found in the fact that both the men and the 

issues upon which they were elected were displeasing to Col. 
Benton.48 

A Democratic delegation with liberal views on the cur- 
rency could be of greater service to St. Louis in a Democratic 
legislature than could a Whig delegation. The opportunity 
for this service came on the election of the president and 
directors of the Bank. As noted above, soon after the legis- 
lature adjourned in 1841, the Bank by vote of its directors 
decided to receive deposits of depreciated currency. The 
Hard money Democrats of the State were opposed to that 
policy of the Bank and decided to elect to the presidency 
Dr. Penn, of Howard county, a Hard money Democrat whom 
they were sure they could trust. The St. Louis Democrats 
were much averse to a Hard money man from the country 
and determined to elect Kenneth, one of the directors who 
had voted to receive the depreciated currency. C. F, Jackson, 
of Howard county, led the fight for the Hards and Thos. B. 
Hudson led the St. Louis delegation. Hudson forced the 
issue and Jackson played for delay. The test vote came on 
a resolution of Jackson's which provided for an investigating 
committee and put off the election until the committee would 
have time to report. This resolution was defeated by a vote 
of 42 ayes to 86 nays.^^ 

This was the first definite conflict between the Hards 
led by a group of men dubbed by their opponents the "Cen- 

"Penn's Letters, Missouri Register, Nov. 14, 1843. 
"House Journal, 1840, pp. 100-102. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 169 

tral Clique" and the Softs led by Hudson of St. Louis, English 
of Cape Girardeau, Ex-Governor Boggs of Jackson county, 
Ellis of Clinton county, and Wells of Lincoln county. Con- 
spicuous among the leaders of the Central Clique were C. F. 
Jackson, J. J. Lowery, Dr. Scott, Redman, and Governor 
Reynolds, all of Howard county; and in addition to these, 
sometimes called the Fayette Clique, Dr. Penn, Marmaduke, 
and Sterling Price should be mentioned. The Jefferson 
Inquirer became the champion of the Hards, and the Missouri 
Reporter of St. Louis was the leading newspaper of the Softs. 

Until the fight over the election of the president of the 
Bank, the Inquirer and The Reporter had maintained friendly 
relations, but the Reporter now came out openly and con- 
demned the Central Clique in even stronger terms than The 
Argus had used. The Inquirer replied editorially: "War 
has been declared by the press of St. Louis both Whig and 
Democratic, and it is a war in favor of small notes, against 
hard money; in favor of shinplasters and swindling shops, 
against half eagles and Benton mint drops; and every member 
of the legislature who does not bow in submission to the coali- 
tion will be marked for proscription at the next election. 
Their hate extends from Benton to every member who does 
not obey implicitly the commands of their St. Louis masters. 
We say to the Democracy of the state every man to his post."^" 
The fight was now on in dead earnest. The Reporter struck a 
popular chord in advocating districting and a constitutional 
convention. The blows of Penn began to tell. Something 
had to be done or the Hards would be overthrown. Col. 
Switzler, editor of the Statesman (Whig), in commenting upon 
a Democratic mass meeting in Clinton county which had pro- 
posed David R. Atchison for governor said: "This will prove 
serious and annoying to the Central Clique," and referring 
to Penn, "He will either whip them into open advocacy of 
his doctrine or he will guillotine every mother's son of them 
from his excellency down." " 

After the Bank election the factional contest opened up 
as a newspaper fight. The Democratic press of the state 

^'Jefferson Inquirer, Jan. 5, 1843. 
"Statesman, Apr. 21, 1843. 



170 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

began to take sides either with the Reporter or the Inquirer. 
New papers were started at strategic points by both factions 
and efforts were made by each to overthrow the presses of 
the other. Penn by pushing the constitutional questions 
and districting to the front secured the support of several 
papers in the border of the State. The Soft press of the 
state included, in addition to the Reporter, the Ozark Eagle, 
at Springfield, the Liberty Banner, in Clay county, the Grand 
River Chronicle, at Chillicothe, the Osage Yeoman, at Warsaw, 
and the Missouri Register, at Boonville. The unquestioned 
Hard papers were the Jefferson Inquirer, the Boonslick Demo- 
crat, in Howard county, the Fayette Democrat, in Howard 
county, the Paris Sentinel, the Western Missourian, in Jack- 
son county, the Boonville Argus, and the Missouri Standard 
(later the Missourian), in St. Louis. The Liberty Banner 
and the Osage Yeoman (Soft) and the Missouri Standard and 
the Boonville Argus (Hard) were established during the year 
1843. 

Such was the political condition in Missouri when Col. 
Benton arrived from Washington in the summer of 1843, 
and threw the great weight of his influence into the contest 
on the side of the Hards. During the summer Benton made 
his usual trip to the central part of the state. After his visit 
to Warsaw the Osage Yeoman (Soft) announced in an editorial 
that Benton was in favor of the districting system. Benton, 
as soon as he saw the editorial, made the following announce- 
ment over his signature dated August 23, 1843, which was 
published and copied in practically all the papers of the 
state: "Justice to my political friends (against whom my 
imputed opinions are quoted) requires me to notice a state- 
ment in the Osage Yeoman in which opinions are attributed 
to me which I never expressed, as that I was in favor of the 
district system — that Col. Johnson would take the western 
states, etc. The editor of the Yeoman has been misinformed 
and I deem it my duty to say so as an act of justice to my 
political friends, seeing the use which is made of this erroneous 
statement against them." ^'^ This is all the part that Benton 
took in the contest on the district question so far as the records 

"Statesman, Sept. 1. 1843. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 171 

show, but from this time on the Softs had a great deal to say 
about his opposition to districting. 

On Benton's return to St. Louis he wrote a number of 
letters in which he made suggestions concerning the. factional 
fight within the Democratic ranks. These could leave no 
doubt in the minds of Penn and his followers as to Benton's 
attitude toward them. For instance in his Palmyra letter of 
September 16, declining an invitation to visit the city, he 
said: "Your allusions to insidious and disguised enemies of 
the party are just and true. I have long seen their designs 
such as you describe them; and time will soon verify all that 
you have said. But no matter. Underhanded enemies 
cannot flourish in Missouri. The spirit of the country is 
high, and requires an open foe and a manly contest. To make 
war upon a party while professing to belong to it, — to under- 
mine public men while professing to support them — to foment 
division while preaching union, to kiss Tylerites and Whigs 
while biting Democrats, is a specie of warfare of recent im- 
portation among us, and which can have but a brief existence 
in our generous clime." Also under date of September 16, 
Benton wrote his letter to the Clay county committee 
(quoted above) in which he took a position against a con- 
stitutional convention because of the danger of sweeping 
away the restrictions on banking. 

A Hard Democratic paper, the Missouri Standard, 
which had been started in St. Louis in the spring of 1843, 
had never attained sufficient circulation to make it effective. 
Benton and the Hard faction started a new paper in its 
stead, the Missourian, under the management of Van Ant- 
werp, an editor from Iowa. Benton wrote a strong letter of 
recommendation for Van Antwerp and urged Democrats in 
all parts of the State to support the new paper. This letter 
was published and widely copied by the press both Whig and 
Democratic. The Missouri Register (Soft) and the Statesman 
(Whig) claimed that it was scattered over the State under 
Benton's frank.^^ These letters, together with Benton's 
statement in answer to the Osage Yeoman (quoted above) 

"Missouri Register, Oct. 3, Dec. 18, 1843; Statesman, Sept. 29, 1843. 



172 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

declaring that the Yeoman was mistaken in quoting him as 
having favored districting, put him at the head of the contest 
against the Softs, put new vigor into the Hards, caused a 
closer alignment, and brought Penn out in the open against 
Benton. 

CONTEST FOR PARTY CONTROL. 

Benton's emphatic support of the Hards and the Central 
Clique left the Softs no choice except submission or open 
opposition to Benton. The Softs at heart had probably- 
been opposed to Benton for sometime, but had dreaded the 
efifect upon the public of an open breach with him. A few 
of the bolder ones among them had declared openly against 
him, and it was no doubt true that some adhered to the Soft 
faction not because of their views upon the currency but 
because of their feeling of hatred to Benton whose speeches 
and well known views upon the money question made him 
the logical leader of the Hards. The position of The Ozark 
Eagle, it seems, is to be explained in this way. A deep seated 
antagonism to the Central Clique and to Benton in particular 
appears to have existed at Springfield as early as 1840.^* 

In addition to Col. Benton's strong and open support of 
the Hards there was one other event, which occurred in 
November, 1843, which probably exercised a determining 
influence upon the contest. Dr. Linn, United States Senator 
from Missouri and colleague of Col. Benton, died and Governor 
Reynolds thus suddenly found at his disposal the office of 
United States Senator. The Northwest was at that time 
one of the most rapidly growing sections of the State and a 
strong anti-Central Clique and Soft sentiment existed there. 
David R. Atchison, of Clinton county, the most popular 
man of that section, from all the evidence as will be shown 
later, a Soft and no doubt at heart an anti-Benton man, was 
appointed United States Senator to fill the vacancy caused 
by the death of Senator Linn. In this appointment Gov- 
ernor Reynolds who was accused by the Softs of being the 
head of the Central Clique made it appear that there was 

**Jefferson Inquirer, Jan. 27, 1842. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 173 

no such organization by going to the border of the State 
and selecting a leader of the opposing faction for the highest 
position within the gift of the people of Missouri. More 
important than the general effect and appearance was the 
fact that in this appointment Governor Reynolds spiked 
the guns of Atchinson and his friends and if he did not make 
them supporters of Benton, he at least put them in a posi- 
tion where they could not afford to openly oppose him. 

On October 24, 1843, Penn, the editor of The Missouri 
Reporter, began the publication of a series of open daily letters 
to Benton.^^ In these letters, eight in number and each 
four or five columns in length, Penn came out openly against 
Benton; reviewed his own and Benton's positions on public 
questions in the past, the St. Louis situation, the work of the 
Central Clique, and the issues of the contest. Much atten- 
tion was given to the Central Clique and Benton's connection 
with it, and his obligation to it was clearly shown. The 
constitutional questions, the districting question and the 
currency question were given much space and were well 
handled from the Soft point of view. The chief feature of 
the letters, however, was a direct personal attack upon 
Benton. He was compared to Louis XIV of France, de- 
nounced as a political dictator and a tyrant of the worst 
sort, and accused of being responsible for the schemes and 
slates of the Central Clique. On questions of national 
policy, especially the currency, Benton was accused of having 
borrowed all his ideas from Calhoun. 

In conclusion Penn intimated that Benton's wonted 
decision of character had deserted him, that should his clique 
friends advise him to back straight out of State politics and 
cease to play the dictator, he would prove discreet and tame 
enough to do so. They would long since have tendered such 
advice to him but for their selfish desire to use his power to 
enable them to monopolize the offices of the State. This 
had been the secret of their past devotion to Benton and it 
was the cause of the fervor of their faith in him. If they had 
sung hozannas they were inspired by ambition and not by 
love, and as the prospect of aggrandizing themselves by the 

•'Copied in the Missouri Register, weekly, November and December, 1843. 



174 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

use of Benton's name might diminish, their songs of praise 
would gradually die away. Penn advised Benton to look to 
those whom he had regarded as faithful to the cause in Morgan 
and Howard counties and closed his characterization of 
Benton's Clique friends as follows: "Finally, when rode down 
by the charlatans in whom you confide they will be the first to 
forget the good that you have done, and the most active and 
malevolent in exposing and condemning your errors and trans- 
gressions. Like your special friend of The Globe they regard 
all minorities as anti-democratic, and whenever you cease to 
command a majority of the state, their peculiar principles 
will compel them to denounce you right or wrong, as a re- 
creant and a traitor. Mark this prediction. It may be 
verified sooner than you expect." 

The publication of Penn's letters gave a renewed impetus 
to the factional fight and turned the emphasis from the cur- 
rency and other issues to the personality of Benton. The 
two factions still called each other Hards and Softs but in 
reality they became Benton and Anti-Benton factions. 

There are four principal lines of evidence which throw 
some light on the factional struggle during the winter of 1843- 
44. 

First, the press of the State, especially the Democratic 
press, was full of editorials. These were partisan in varing 
degrees, but usually quite bitter. The Whig press, although 
it professed to stand aloof, was certainly characterized by a 
strong Anti-Benton tone. In February, 1864, there were 
twenty-four political papers published in the State. Four- 
teen of these were Democratic.^® Of these fourteen, five 
were certainly anti-Benton, six were undoubtedly Benton 
papers. Strenuous efforts were made by each side to support 
its own press and if opportunity offered to overthrow the op- 
position papers. With the publication of the Penn letters 
the Democratic press took a more definite position. The 
Benton papers had insisted for nearly a year before Penn's 
letters were published that the real issue was "Benton or no 
Benton." " 

''Statesman, Feb. 2, 1844. 
'''Jefferson Inquirer, Sept. 21, 1843. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 175 

Second, since 1840 there had been a gradual and fairly 
rapid growth of political organization. But this was accom- 
panied by considerable opposition, sometimes violent, from 
those known as independents, who did not believe in political 
machinery and organization. This growth of political ma- 
chinery took place in both parties but was more rapid and 
popular in the Democratic than in the Whig party. Neither 
side seemed to understand the real value of the machinery 
of the party organization that had been built up. In 1840 
there were no permanent committees. Campaigns had to 
be started by the newspapers. Usually one paper suggested 
a meeting or convention. If the suggestion met with the 
approval of the other editors in the territory concerned they 
copied and recommended the meeting. The press then got 
behind the convention and pushed it, and urged county or 
township meetings, to organize and to elect delegates. This 
condition probably accounts for the great importance at- 
tached to the press by all the politicians of the period. Com- 
mittees of correspondence were appointed after the news- 
papers had started the movement, but their duty ended with 
the election as did the State Central Committee, which was 
simply a committee appointed from a few counties in the 
central part of the State, usually Howard, Cooper, Boone, 
Cole and Callaway .^^ In 1841 a movement was begun, prob- 
ably by the Central Clique, having for its purpose the organi- 
zation of the democracy along the lines of the party organiza- 
tion in New York. This movement grew rapidly and by 
the spring of 1844 the Democratic party had a permanent 
organization in nearly all the counties of the state with 
standing committees very similar to those of political parties 
of today. 

Third, the sentiment of the rank and file of the democ- 
racy of the State may be found by examining the reports 
of the county meetings held in the winter of 1843-44 for the 
purpose of electing delegates to the State Convention. As 
soon as "Benton or no Benton" had come to be acknowledged 
by all as the real issue, the Hard papers began to refer to the 
constitutional convention, districting, and even the details 
"Missouri Register, Oct. 22, 1840. 



176 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

of the currency bills, meaning the penalties, as mere matters 
upon which Democrats might honestly differ. The real question 
at issue was the election of the United States Senator. Missouri 
must stand by her distinguished statesman. To be disloyal 
to Benton, according to these papers, was to be a traitor to 
the party. This change of emphasis gave the Hards a great 
advantage. There was a real contest in nearly all the coun- 
ties of the State, so that the resolutions passed meant some- 
thing. The Central Clique undoubtedly had their lieutenants 
in most of these counties and probably half a dozen men 
attempted to call the meeting, get themselves elected as 
officers and committeemen, adopt a cut and dried set of reso- 
lutions, and have themselves sent as delegates to the State 
Convention at Jefferson City, but the fight became too hot 
for that sort of thing to work well. Both sides played at 
the same game and then it became a question of getting out 
the vote. Each man in most instances had an opportunity 
to vote for the kind of resolution that he wanted on the 
question at issue. While one side usually elected the chair- 
man and controlled the committee on resolutions, the other 
side was always ready with substitute resolutions on the im- 
portant questions. The real contest for the control and party 
name was fought out in these meetings. Forty sets of these 
county resolutions have been examined. Out of the forty 
only five were radically Soft, while eleven were radically 
Hard; but seventeen showed Soft tendencies, while only 
seven, not radically Hard, showed Hard tendencies. The 
counties which adopted Soft resolutions were St. Louis, Cape 
Girardeau, Clinton, Clay and Lafayette. The Hard counties 
were Howard, Saline, Pettis, Cole, Morgan, Miller, Boone, Cal- 
laway, Randolph, Macon and Washington. A glance at the 
map shows that there was good reason for the charges of the 
existence of a Central Clique. All the radically Hard coun- 
ties except Washington were compactly grouped in the 
center, and in this central territory all the counties were Hard 
except Cooper where The Missouri Register was published. 
There were three Soft strongholds. One was in St. Louis 
where the movement had begun. Another was in the South- 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 177 

east, the home of English, a prominent Soft leader and later 
a candidate against Benton for the United States Senate. 
The third was in the Northwest, the home of Senator At- 
chison and A. A. King, a prominent Soft, a Circuit Judge and 
later Governor of the State. 

In the Northwest the Anti-Clique feeling seemed to be 
stronger than in any other part of the State outside of St. 
Louis. Three of the five counties from which radically Soft 
resolutions were reported were in that section of the State. 
Two of the Soft papers, The Liberty Banner and The Grand 
River Chronicle, were located there. General Atchison, 
without doubt the most prominent man among the Softs, 
lived in Clinton county. Atchison's later prominence makes 
it advisable to examine the evidence of his Soft tendencies. 
The evidence is largely indirect as there is no statement of 
his position made by himself at this time. There is enough 
indirect evidence, however, to settle beyond any reasonable 
doubt his position. Penn in an editorial asked the editor of 
The Inquirer if he would support any one of a number of men, 
including Atchison, for governor, the men named being Softs. 
The Statesman, a Whig paper, gave an account of a meeting 
held in Clinton county, a radically Anti-Benton county, 
which proposed Atchison for governor; Switzler, the editor, 
in his comments on this meeting said that this would prove 
embarrassing to the Central Clique. In an editorial quoted 
from the Missourian on the districting question, the editor 
said: "We will inform the Banner that if the views of that 
paper accord with those of its favorite Senator we have 
reason to believe there will be no material difference between 
us in regard to districting." The fact that Atchison was the 
favorite Senator of the Banner, an open opponent of Benton, 
was significant as was also the evidence of his position on the 
districting question. The New Era,^^ a Whig paper published 
in St. Louis, said that Atchison was a Johnson man; this also 
is significant though not conclusive; not all Johnson men 
were anti-Benton but most of them were. The Inquirer 
said: "General Atchison who has lately been appointed to a 
seat in the United States Senate prefers that the legislature 

"Quoted in Jefferson Inquirer, Nov. 16, 1843. 



178 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

should at the next session district the state." And again: 
"General Atchison believes Col. Johnson to be the most 
available man for President." The Missouri Register, the 
leading Anti-Benton paper outside of St. Louis, said editor- 
ially: "Hon. David R. Atchison has been appointed to fill 
the vacancy caused by the death of Linn. It is a good ap- 
pointment. The judge, unlike Col. Benton, is in favor of 
districting the state for the election of members to Congress, 
is a true and liberal Democrat. We have heard it intimated 
that he was recommended to the governor by Col. Benton 
as a suitable man to be his colleague; if so, the Colonel is 
deceived, for the judge is a Johnson man, goes for the district 
system and against the proscription of any portion of the 
Democratic party, which is more than we can say for Col. 
Benton". ^'^ Finally, good evidence is found in the manner 
in which the appointment of Atchison was received in the 
Northwest. A correspondent writing in the Liberty Banner 
after describing the joy in that section over the appointment 
of Atchison said: "Governor Reynolds in this act has gone 
far to secure the gratitude of the whole upper Missouri, he 
has acted justly, wisely, and well. He has done more by 
this act, to put down the rising indignation of the people, 
against the so-called Central Clique — he has done more to 
prove that there is no such thing, or that it exists no longer, 
than a thousand semi-official bulletins of The Inquirer. We 
of the upper country hail this as an omen of peace and good 
will." «i 

Fourth, the final contest for the control of the Party 
machinery was fought in the State Convention assembled 
at Jefferson City the first Monday in April, 1844. It is im- 
possible to get the details of the conflict there. They were 
purposely concealed. In the published report of the con- 
vention no resolution, motion, or measure of any kind that 
failed to obtain a majority vote was mentioned. This action 
was in accordance with a resolution of instruction to the 
secretary of the convention. No record of division on any 
resolution or other question, except the vote on the can- 

"Missouri Register, Oct. 17, 1843. 

"Liberty Banner, quoted in Jefferson Inquirer, Nov. 16, 1843. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 179 

didates for governor, involving the relative strength of the 
two factions has been found. All that is certain is that the 
Hards obtained control of the Convention and tabled all 
resolutions relating to districting, constitutional convention, 
currency, etc., and then forbade the secretary to publish 
the record of the vote by which these measures were tabled. ®- 
The strength of the two factions seems to have been nearly 
equal in the Convention. If the Soft delegations from St. 
Louis and Benton county had not been unseated it is prob- 
able the Softs would have controlled the Convention instead 
of the Hards. As it was, a compromise candidate, Edwards 
of Cole county, a strong supporter of Benton but in accord 
with the Softs on all the State issues, was nominated for 
Governor. The Hards compelled their candidate, Marma- 
duke, of Saline, to withdraw and supported Edwards and 
nominated him over King, Soft candidate from the North- 
west, by a vote of sixty-six to forty-two. The Convention 
refused to take any position on the State questions. So far 
as issues were concerned its resolutions mentioned national 
questions only. The resolutions contained a brief endorse- 
ment of Atchison and the Congressional delegation, which 
Loughborough, a member of the Convention from Clay 
county, said (in an article in the Liberty BannerY^ was not in 
the original draft. The principal resolution was the one 
endorsing Benton. It read as follows: "Resolved, that the 
public course of Thomas H. Benton, as United States Senator 
from Missouri; his patriotic measures to increase the supply 
of constitutional currency — to establish the subtreasury — 
to graduate the price of public land — to extend and make 
permanent the right of pre-emption — to abolish bounties on 
exports and duties on salt, and to provide for taking posses- 
sion of Oregon — his stern opposition to the increase or ex- 
tension of chartered monopolies — to the fraudulent bank- 
rupt law — his war to the knife on the Bank of the United 
States — his gallant defense and successful vindication of 
President Jackson from the recorded slanders of the Federal 
parties, slanders which on his motion the people of the United 

"Missouri Register, Apr. 16, 1844. 
"Missouri Register, copied, Apr. 30, 1844. 



180 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

States ordered to be expunged, entitle him to the unreserved 
respect, esteem, and confidence of the Democratic party of 
Missouri."®^ There was also a clause in the Atchison resolu- 
tion, "that we recommend to the Democracy of Missouri 
not to vote for any candidate for the legislature who will not 
pledge himself, if elected, to vote for the election of Thomas 
H. Benton and David R. Atchison as United States Senators 
from Missouri." 

The proceedings, resolutions, and nominees of the con- 
vention make it clear that the fight was preeminently a "Ben- 
ton or no Benton" fight. On a platform that did not mention 
state issues, the Benton men gave the Softs candidates for 
governor and lieutenant governor who had publicly advo- 
cated districting, a constitutional convention, and had pub- 
licly expressed themselves against the penalties of the cur- 
rency bills, and only demanded in return party loyalty, close 
organization and strong support for Benton. But the Hards 
had secured possession of the party name, the title to party 
regularity; and in doing so had obtained an engine of political 
warfare whose power was to receive its first demonstration in 
Missouri in the ensuing campaign. 

CAMPAIGN AND ELECTION, 1843-1844. 

The Democratic state convention adjourned April 4, 
and soon the delegates had carried the story of the convention 
to their home counties. The suppressing in the official pro- 
ceedings of all resolutions and motions which did not carry 
seemed to make little difference so far as the spreading of the 
news of these things was concerned. The Softs who called 
themselves "Liberal Democrats" immediately began publish- 
ing caustic criticisms of the convention proceedings. Special 
emphasis was placed upon "Gag law" and the use of the pre- 
vious question. The convention was severely criticised for 
not taking a position upon State issues. It was referred to 
as a "mum" convention and much was made of its mum 
policy. A third general line of criticism was directed against 
the convention's attitude toward Benton. 

"Missouri Register, Apr. 16, 1844. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 181 

While there seems to have been a great deal of dissatis- 
faction among the Democrats concerning the convention's 
action, yet there was no organized effort to hold a convention 
of the Anti-Benton men. Probably the failure to make any 
effort to hold a convention was due to the fact that the con- 
vention as a method of placing candidates before the people 
was comparitively new and a great many doubted the wisdom 
of it.^® Many people considered it similar to the much dis- 
credited caucus, and very likely the Democrats who were 
disgruntled would be appealed to more easily by a ticket 
presented by the personal initiative of the candidates than 
by one put in the field by a hastily called convention. 

Judge C. H. Allen, a strong anti-Central Clique man, 
had announced himself as an independent candidate for gov- 
ernor, at least three months before the convention.*^ Can- 
didates began to announce for the various offices in rapid 
succession as the news of the convention's action spread over 
the State. So many announced that it became necessary to 
have an understanding among them to prevent more than 
one man from running for the same office. This was ac- 
complished by correspondence and conferences among the 
leading Softs. To arrange the ticket was a very difficult 
task. Sometimes the real leaders were compelled to with- 
draw in order to prevent a multiplicity of candidates. Thus 
Carty Wells, later president of the Constitutional Conven- 
tion, w^ho had announced for Congress from the Northeast, 
had to withdraw for Ratcliff Boon.*'' By the end of May the 
ticket had been arranged. The Missouri Register, the first 
paper to place the ticket at the head of its editorial column 
as the Liberal Democratic ticket, came out, May 22, with a 
full ticket as follows: Governor, C. H. Allen; Lieutenant 
Governor, Wm. B. Almond; for Congress, Leonard H. Simms, 
of Greene county; Thomas B. Hudson, of St. Louis; RatclifT 
Boon, of Pike county; John Thornton, of Clay county; and 
Augustus Jones, of Washington county. The Missouri 
Register said, "We place at the head of our column this week 

"St. Louis Republican, Dec. 23, 1843. 

"Ibid. 

'"'Jefferson Inquirer, Apr. 18, 1844. 



182 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

the Independent Democratic ticket as it appears to have 
been settled upon by the Liberal Democratic party of the 
state." Other candidates soon withdrew and the lines 
became definitely drawn between the two Democratic tickets. 

The Whigs had early decided not to run a State or Con- 
gressional ticket, but to concentrate their efforts upon the 
legislative ticket and attempt to carry the legislature and 
beat Benton.*'^ The Whig press assumed the attitude of 
disinterested spectators and repeatedly urged their followers 
not to participate in the contest between the two Democratic 
tickets.«9 However, the Whigs generally supported the Soft 
Democratic ticket with the connivance and through the 
direction of the Democratic leaders. 

The Hard Democrats emphatically denied the assertion 
of the Whig and Soft press that the convention was against 
a constitutional convention, against the district system, and 
in favor of currency bills. They declared that the convention 
had not gone on record for or against these questions, but 
had simply refused to consider them as vital issues or tests 
of Democratic principles, that the candidates had been se- 
lected without regard to these questions; but, as a matter of 
fact, both Mr. Edwards and Mr. Young, candidates for Gov- 
ernor and Lieutenant Governor, were in favor of a constitu- 
tional convention and districting, and against the penalties 
and test oaths of the currency bills. '^° 

This position practically took away from the Independ- 
ents their issues, and confined them to opposition to Benton, 
the only issue upon which the Regulars would disagree with 
them. The chief arguments of the Regulars were those of 
party loyalty. Treachery, traitor candidates, traitor papers, 
and traitor party were common expressions.'^^ These profes- 
sions and charges were met by the -Independents with charges 
of egotism, dictation, and tyranny against Benton; with edi- 
torials upon "pains and penalties, test oaths, and proscrip- 
tion;" with charges of insincerity and hypocrisy against the 

''Statesman, Sept. 1, 1843. 

"Ibid., Apr. 5. 1844. 

^"Jefferson Inquirer, Apr. 11, 1844. 

^'Missouri Register, June 11, 25, 1844. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 183 

Hards in their attitude of districting, a constitutional con- 
vention, and currency bills. 

Party organization was used effectively and some re- 
markable changes began to take place. The Grand River 
Chronicle, published at Chillicothe, had all along been with 
Penn, but after the convention it came out for the regular 
nominees and said the Independents would get little encour- 
agement in that section. ''^ Even in St. Louis a meeting 
called by the Penn faction adopted resolutions declaring 
allegiance to the nominees of the Democratic state conven- 
tion. 

The Anti-Benton men claimed that Benton, secretly, was 
not loyal to the national Democratic ticket for which they 
professed great enthusiasm. Benton's strong preference for 
Van Buren was well known in Missouri. Soon after Polk's 
nomination Benton wrote a letter to the Missourian, in- 
tending it to be published for the benefit of Polk and Dallas, 
in which he said: "Neither Mr. Polk nor Mr. Dallas have had 
anything to do with the intrigue which has nullified the choice 
of the people ***** and neither of them should be in- 
jured or prejudiced by it. * * * * The people now as twenty 
years ago will teach the Congress intriguers to attend to law 
making and let president making and unmaking alone in 
the future." " "The Texas treaty which consummated their 
intrigue was nothing but the final act in a long conspiracy 
in which the sacrifice of Mr. Van Buren had been previously 
agreed upon." The Softs attacked Benton's letter dwelling 
especially upon the words "intrigue" and "Congress intri- 
guers." In an editorial in The Missouri Register Benton was 
made to say that Polk and Dallas were nominated by Congress 
intriguers. The editor then said: "If they are the tools of 
intriguers neither Benton nor anybody else can con- 
scientiously support them. The receiver of stolen goods is 
as bad as the thief." 

"•^Jefferson Inquirer, May 2, 1844. 
"Missouri Register, June 25, 1844. 



184 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 



BENTON AND TEXAS. 



But the chief attacks upon Benton in the latter part of 
the campaign and the ones which seemed to have the greatest 
effect were those directed against his attitude upon the an- 
nexation of Texas. Benton had that western spirit of ex- 
pansion which caused him to resent the loss of a single foot 
of territory and made him always ready to see any territory 
acquired that could be obtained with honor. He had op- 
posed the treaty of 1819, in a series of articles signed Ameri- 
canus and published in the St. Louis Inquirer, because it 
gave Texas to Spain. In another series published in the 
St. Louis Beacon in 1829, signed La Salle, he advocated the 
acquisition of Texas and he always favored the annexation 
of Texas at any time that it could be brought about without 
compromising the honor of the Country. 

In 1844 the Tyler administration negotiated a treaty 
with the republic of Texas which provided for its annexation 
to the United States. The prospect of getting Texas was 
hailed with delight in Missouri, but to the surprise of every 
one, friends and enemies alike, Benton came out against the 
ratification of the treaty. Why he took such a position im- 
mediately became a matter of controversy. His enemies 
claimed that he was actuated by contemptible motives of 
jealousy of Calhoun, and that his arguments against the treaty 
were without a basis of fact. His friends said that the treaty 
was really bad and that Benton had not only the knowledge 
of conditions and the foresight to enable him to see the bad 
features and the motives back of them, but that he also had 
the courage and the manhood to expose them.^* Benton 
certainly displayed courage in taking the position that he 
did against annexation at that time. Everyone knew that 
annexation was exceedingly popular in Missouri, and no one 
knew it better than did Benton. He knew also that he had a 
tremendous conflict on his hands in Missouri in which his 
very political existence was at stake. 

Benton said that the treaty was "a scheme, on the part 
of some of its movers, to dissolve the union — on the part of 

'"Jefferson Inquirer, July 4, 1844. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 185 

some others, an intrigue for the presidency — and on the part 
of others a land speculation and a job in script." He de- 
clared that to ratify the treaty meant war with Mexico. 
He was very much averse to war with Mexico and was es- 
pecially anxious to cultivate friendly trade relations. Prob- 
ably his jealousy of and opposition to Calhoun tended to 
cause him to oppose the treaty; certainly, his knowledge of 
the Spanish land grants and the claims based upon them 
enabled him to see the defects of the treaty in this respect; 
and his ardent devotion to the Union caused him to oppose 
what he thot was a scheme to dissolve it; but no doubt his 
chief reason for opposing the treaty was that it would bring 
on a war with Mexico. In this last objection, at least, later 
events proved that his judgment was correct. The treaty, 
largely thru Benton's efforts, failed of ratification in the 
Senate of the United States. He then introduced a bill pro- 
viding for the annexation of Texas by a method which he 
said would avoid war with Mexico.'^ 

But why should Benton be so averse to a war with Mexico? 
He did not ordinarily avoid a fight. No true westerner did, 
and probably the one ambition of his life was to become a 
military hero. His peculiar aversion to war with Mexico at 
this time can only be understood when we view the situation 
from the viewpoint of Benton's fundamental public policy. 
There can be no doubt but that Benton's dominant interest 
in public questions was centered around the currency problem. 
Soon after the failure of the Territorial Bank of Missouri, of 
which he had been a director, Benton had taken a strong 
position in favor of gold and silver as the constitutional 
currency of the country ; '® he had been the real moving spirit 
behind Jackson in the beginning as well as thruout the fight 
against the second Bank of the United States. ^^ He had 
secured the change of ratio between gold and silver that had 
caused gold to circulate. ^^ He had suggested and always 
worked diligently for the sub-treasury.''^ He had proposed 

i>Congressional Globe, Vol. 13, (Session 1843 and 44) p. 474. 

■"Statesman, Jan. 19, 1844. 

^■•Thirty Years' View, Vol. I. pp. 158ff. 

^'Laughlin's Principles of Money, pp. 427ff. 

''Thirty Years' View, Vol. I, pp. 158fl. 



186 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

to tax the currency of the state banks out of existence.^" In 
a speech, in 1840, which was reprinted in The Inquirer in 
1843, just after he had visited Jefferson City, Benton said, 
"The currency question is the greatest question of the age," 
and later in the same speech, "I repeat it, the currency 
question is the great question of the age; it absorbs and 
swallows up every other." And it was his attempt to put 
into practice his currency ideas in the State of Missouri that 
had involved him in a fight to the bitter end for his political 
existence. Benton's position on the Texas treaty and his 
aversion to the war which he believed would follow its ratifi- 
cation becomes clear when it is viewed from the standpoint 
of its effect upon the currency situation in the United States 
and especially in the West. 

The great obstacle to Benton's currency schemes was 
the lack of sufficient hard money for circulation. He had 
always claimed that the hard money would come if the small 
notes were not allowed to circulate. Hence, his effort to 
have the legislature of Missouri prohibit under heavy penalties 
the circulation of small notes in Missouri. But if small notes 
were not to circulate gold and silver must be obtained to 
circulate in the place of them. Where was it to come from? 
Benton looked to Mexico for much of it. 

In a speech in the Senate on his bill for the admission of 
Texas he urged as the chief claim for the superiority of his 
bill over the treaty that it would avoid the war with Mexico, 
which the treaty would have caused. After showing that 
such a war would be unjust and dishonorable he said, "Policy 
and interest if not justice and honor, should make us refrain 
from this war. We have, or rather had, a great commerce 
with Mexico, which deserves protection instead of destruc- 
tion. Our trade with this country commenced with the first 
year of her independence — 1821 — and we received from her 
that year $80,000 in specie. It increased annually and 
vastly and in the year 1835, the year before the revolution, 
this import increased to $8,343,181 on the custom house 
books beside the amounts not entered.^^ Our sympathy and 

"Congressional Globe, Vol. 10. (1841-42) 27th Congress, pp. 81ff. 
"Congressional Globe, Vol. 13. (1843-44) pp. 474-497. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 187 

supposed aid to the Texans lost us the favor of the Mexicans, 
and the imports ran down in seven years to $1,342,817. 
New Orleans, and thru her, the great West, was the greatest 
gainer by this import while it flourished — and of course the 
greatest looser when it declined; and instead of destroying 
the remainder of it, and all commerce with our nearest 
neighbor, by an unjust assumption of war against her, we 
should rather choose to restore this specie import to its former 
maximum and increase it. We should rather choose to cherish 
and improve a valuable trade with a neighbor that has mines, 
and whose staple is silver. Atlantic politicians hot in the 
pursuit of Texas may have no sympathy for this Mexican 
trade, but I have; and it has been my policy to reconcile 
these two objects — acquisition of Texas and the preservation 
of Mexican trade — and, therefore, to eschew unjust war 
with Mexico as not only wicked but foolish." Benton in his 
letter to the Texas Congress dated May 2, 1844, in which 
he urged the desirability of annexation without war, used 
the same arguments and stressed the import of gold and 
silver into the United States. 

But these as well as all other arguments appeared to 
fall upon deaf ears so far as Missouri Democrats were con- 
cerned. Even The Jefferson Inquirer, probably the strongest 
Benton paper in the state, in the same issue in which it pub- 
lished Benton's letter to the Texan Congress had an editorial 
a column in length advocating the immediate annexation of 
Texas. The Missouri Register's columns were full of at- 
tacks upon Benton because of his position on the Texas 
treaty, for three months before the election. He was ac- 
cused of being a traitor to his country and to the West in 
particular, of being in alliance with the British, and of going 
over to the Whigs. The letters of Clay, Van Buren, and 
Benton, all opposing immediate annexation, were compared 
and attacked bitterly, especially that of Benton.*^ 

Public meetings were held in many places, and resolu- 
tions were passed demanding immediate annexation. C. F. 
Jackson and Judge Rawlins of Howard county, candidates, 
one for the House and the other for the State Senate, and 

"Missouri Register, May 14, 1844. 



188 MISSOURI HISTORICAL RliVIEW. 

both old political friends and supporters of Benton, and leaders 
in the Fayette Clique, declared publicly in their campaign 
that they "would not vote for Benton or any other man for 
the United States Senate who was opposed to the immediate 
annexation of Texas." ^ The Whigs approved of Benton's 
course on the Texan treaty, but this Whig endorsement 
served only as a further handicap to Benton in the eyes of 
all good Democrats. 

In the face of all this opposition Benton did not flinch 
or waver on his position. He came to Missouri as soon as 
Congress adjourned and made a speaking tour in which he 
spoke at St. Louis, Jefferson City, Boonville, and other points 
and always explained the Texas question and why he opposed 
the treaty. The speech at Boonville delivered at a great 
Democratic campaign rally July 17, 1844, is typical of his 
campaign speeches during this summer. He first declared 
his personal disinterestedness in the election. He said that 
it was more becoming of him to thank the people of Missouri 
for having elected him four times to the Senate of the United 
States, than to ask for a fifth election, that he was not a 
candidate but that he left his interest in the hands of his 
friends, the Hards. He then proceeded to discuss the Texas 
question and called on all present who had lived in Missouri 
in 1819 to witness that he had been the first to write and speak 
against giving Texas away and the first to suggest annexa- 
tion. He then proceeded in great detail to give an account 
of the making of the treaty of 1819, and fastened upon 
Calhoun the responsibility for giving Texas away. He next 
made an extensive argument against the treaty for annexa- 
tion negotiated by Calhoun, denouncing it as "a carefully 
and artfully contrived plan to dissolve the Union." He fol- 
lowed this with an elaborate argument in favor of his bill 
and the importance of getting Texas without war with 
Mexico, which he said would be accomplished by his measure. 

Benton's stand on the Texas treaty must have lost him 
a good deal of support. It gave those politicians who were 
getting tired of his leadership, or who were secretly opposed 
to him a chance to come out in opposition to him on a popular 

"Missouri Register, June 11, 1844. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 189 

question. Probably C. F. Jackson represented one of these 
types and Atchison the other. Jackson openly came out 
against Benton on annexation and declared that he would 
not vote for him if elected to the legislature, but there is no 
evidence that Atchison opposed the reelection of Benton. 
He seems to have stood aloof from the fight after his appoint- 
ment to the United States Senate, but he boldly took a posi- 
tion against Benton on the treaty when it was being con- 
sidered in the Senate. 

At this time the election for State officers and Congress- 
men was held early in August. At this election the regular 
Democratic candidate for Governor, Edwards, was elected 
by a majority of 5621 over the independent candidate, Allen. 
The Whigs elected forty-four members in the House as against 
twenty-six in the previous house. The General Assembly 
now stood fifty-three Whigs and eighty Democrats, a total 
of one hundred and thirty-three members. Sixty-seven votes 
were required to elect a senator. The Democrats had a clear 
majority of thirteen but no one knew how many Democrats 
were Anti-Benton. The Whigs made considerable inroads 
upon the Democratic strongholds especially in the contests 
for members of the legislature. They even secured two of 
the three representatives from Howard county, the home of 
the Central Clique, and it may have been that Jackson's 
opposition to Benton on the Texas question was what saved 
him. The Missouri Register claimed an Anti-Benton majority 
of four votes. ^ The Reporter claimed Benton was beaten 
by eight votes. ^^ On the other hand The Inquirer claimed 
Benton's election by from sixteen to twenty votes.^^ Thus 
the August election did not determine the contest. 

The anti-Benton Democrats redoubled their efiforts after 
the election. Every issue of their press was full of attacks 
upon Benton. With the State campaign over, the editorials 
turned more on national issues. All kinds of efforts were 
made to cast reflection on Benton and bring him into disre- 
pute. The charge that Benton was really against the national 

"Missouri Register, Aug. 27, 1844. 

"Missouri Reporter, quoted in the Statesman, Sept. 6, 1844. 

"Jefferson Inquirer, Aug. 16, 1844. 



190 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

ticket was renewed. The Reporter quoted Benton as re- 
plying to a compromise proposition that was made to him at 
the National Democratic Convention at Baltimore to the 
effect that Mr. Van Buren withdraw, by saying, "I will see 
the Democratic party sink fifty fathoms deep into the middle 
of hell-fire before I will give one inch with Mr. Van Buren. 
If we cannot obtain victory with Mr. Van Buren we do not 
want victory and will not have it."^'' 

Benton was assailed for not living in the State. "Mis- 
souri," it was said, "has long been a kind of political prin- 
cipality for him, while his residence has been in Virginia 
and Kentucky." ^^ The violence of the contest was shown 
by personal attacks made on Benton. His vote was chal- 
lenged in St. Louis by a Whig who asserted that Benton did 
not live in the State, and he was compelled to swear that St. 
Louis was his residence. Col. Benton had been a director 
in the old Territorial Bank of Missouri, which had failed in 
1819. Some one got a judgment against the Bank and after 
having failed to get the money had Benton arrested for debt. 
He was compelled to plead privilege from arrest as a member 
of Congress. This was done in 1843 and repeated in Sep- 
tember 1844. The Missouri Register without any explana- 
tion of the nature of the debt said, "Col. Benton arrived in 
St. Louis the first of the week and the sheriff served a writ 
for debt on him the next day after he arrived. Is it not 
strange that Col. Benton should be thus used? Certainly it 
is no credit to him, much less to the state of Missouri after 
it has fattened him for a quarter of a century." ^^ Such was 
the character of the attacks made on Benton between August 
first, the date of the election of the legislature, and its as- 
sembly in the latter part of November. 

Petitions were quietly circulated in some counties ad- 
dressed to the legislator asking him to vote for some good 
Democrat instead of Benton. ^^ One of these was circulated 
in Osage county. A correspondent of The Inquirer said that 

'''Reporter, quoted in the Missouri Register, Aug. 27, 1844. 
"Missouri Register, Sept. 10, 1844. 
'^Missouri Register, Oct. 1, 1844. 
"Jefferson Inquirer, Sept. 26, 1844. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 191 

what the Softs could not effect by open warfare, he feared 
some more insidious, was endeavoring to effect by strategy, 
which was only Softism in a new form. The former was an 
undisguised attack upon Col. Benton for the avowed object 
of his political destruction; the latter was slyly and subtly 
spreading the poison of disaffection. He said the annexa- 
tion of Texas was the avowed object of the opposition but 
in reality their purpose was the elevation of political in- 
triguers. When the above statements are considered in con- 
nection with C. F. Jackson's active opposition to Benton on 
the Texas question, and the fact that Osage county was a 
Hard county and had always adhered to the Central Clique 
it would seem that there was not only good grounds for 
questioning Jackson's loyalty to Benton but also strong 
reasons for condemning his motives for and methods of oppo- 
sition, if the inference that he was the political intriguer in 
whose behalf the papers of instruction were being circulated 
was true. 

In Benton's speeches on Texas he had always declared 
himself in favor of annexation at the earliest practicable 
moment. Texas meetings where Benton's friends prevailed 
adopted resolutions using the expression "earliest practicable 
moment," while those meetings where Benton's friends were 
in a minority used the word "immediate" in their resolutions. 
C. F. Jackson addressed a Texas meeting in Randolph 
county (one of the extreme Hard counties that had always 
lined up with the Central Clique), which declared for the 
immediate annexation of Texas, and also organized a league 
(patterned after the organization of a political party) for 
the purpose of pushing the immediate annexation without 
the consent of Mexico. ^^ A great Democratic rally was held 
at Hannibal in October. Benton was there and spoke upon 
the annexation of Texas. He emphasized the necessity of 
acquiring Texas, but also emphasized the desirability of 
keeping peace and building up our commerce with Mexico. 
Later in the day his speech was answered by C. F. Jackson, 

»IMd. 



192 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

who advocated the immediate annexation of Texas without 
the consent of Mexico. ^^ 

Benton in his Hannibal speech referred to his position 
as being that of a supposed candidate for the United States 
Senate. He mentioned the fact that he had spoken of it 
once before and had said that having been in the Senate for 
twenty-five years he did not ask a fifth election, that he was 
passive and neutral in the question and left the decision to 
his political friends, the Hards.^' He now repeated what he 
to be said at Boonville and said further that it now became him 
to be more explicit, and to say that he should withdraw his 
name from the canvass if he found any dissention or division 
among his friends. He would not be the cause or subject of 
any dissention among them. No such dissention could take 
place without injury to the party — without impairing its 
harmony and unity — without, perhaps, leading to incurable 
division; and this was a consequence he was irrevocably de- 
termined should never take place on his account. He re- 
peated, he would take care to have his name withdrawn if 
there was any division among his friends, the Hards, to whose 
decision, in all other respects he committed his fate.^* 

THE STRUGGLE IN THE MISSOURI LEGISLATURE. 

The Senatorial contest was hanging in the balance. No 
one knew what the result would be. The date for the as- 
sembling of the Legislature was the third Monday in No- 
vember. Neither side was very confident of success. Both 
were on the alert and ready to take advantage of the slightest 
opportunity to secure the defeat of the other. As the date 
of the meeting of the Legislature drew near the political 
tension increased There were reports that Jackson would 
become a candidate against Benton for the Senatorship.^' 
The politicians gathered early, not only the members of the 
Legislature but it appears that the Benton men had as many 
as possible of their influential leaders come to Jefiferson City 

"St. Louis Republican, Oct. 5, 1844. 

•'Benton's Boonville Speech, published in The Inquirer, July 25, 1844. 
"Benton's Speach at Hannibal Oct. 1, Inquirer, Oct. 17, 1844. 
"St. Louis Republican, Nov. 21, 1844. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 193 

on one pretext or another and then work for Benton on the 
side. The correspondent of The Republican said that there 
were nearly one hundred men there seeking to be selected as 
messenger to Washington, D. C, to carry the official electoral 
vote, all of them active Bentonians.^^ There were many con- 
ferences and much caucusing and at this kind of work the 
Benton men proved themselves superior to their opponents. 
What was accomplished by them is best told in the words of 
the correspondent of The Republican. Writing before the 
meeting of the Legislature he said: "Jackson is to be elected 
Speaker. In this there is a double operation. In the first 
place, the election of Mr. Jackson to the office of Speaker 
will buy him off from contending against Col. Benton for the 
Senatorship, — a fear which has been pretty widely enter- 
tained, and in the next place, it once more manifests the 
influence of the Colonel's favorite measures in the House." 
The chief clerkship is to be given to Mr. Houston as a reward 
for the part he played in support of the Colonel's currency 
measures." Later he said: "The caucus held this morning 
was not harmonious but the offices of speaker, chief clerk, 
etc., were settled. All applicants were required to give a 
pledge to support Col. Benton, — Jackson whose reported split 
with Benton on the Texas question has been so rife goes the 
whole figure." ^^ 

The Legislature met on November 18th. Jackson was 
elected Speaker and Houston chief clerk. Thus the Hards 
controlled the organization. After the organization was 
effected a caucus was held in the Senate chamber. Accord- 
ing to the correspondent of The Republican, "the object was 
to whip the few Softs into the traces and to obtain their 
pledge to support Col. Benton. The meeting was by no 
means harmonious and two or three withdrew refusing to 
pledge themselves. The caucus determined to bring on the 
election at an early day this week. If they can succeed the 
election will probably take place Wednesday or Thursday. 
The opponents of Col. Benton will attempt to procrasti- 

"7Md., Nov. 22, 1844. 

"''St. Louis Republican, Nov. 21, 1844. 

»«7Wd., Nov. 22, 1844. 



194 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

nate, and if they succeed the Colonel's election may be 
regarded as doubtful." ^^ 

On the afternoon of the 19th, Senator Fort submitted a 
joint resolution "to go into the election of Senator of the United 
States to supply the vacancy occasioned by the death of 
Senator Linn, and also the election of a Senator to supply 
the place of Hon. Thomas H. Benton, whose term of service 
expires on the 4th of March, 1845, on tomorrow at 2 o'clock 
P. M." Mr. Ellis, Democrat from the senatorial district in 
which Atchison lived, moved to lay on the table, which 
motion was lost, yeas fourteen, nays nineteen. As there 
were twenty-four Democrats and only nine Whigs in the 
Senate, five Democrats must have voted for the Ellis motion 
to table the resolutions. Ellis then submitted as a sub- 
stitute for Fort's resolution a resolution favoring the imme- 
diate annexation of Texas. The president decided the sub- 
stitute was out of order. Ellis then moved to amend Fort's 
resolution by striking out all that portion after the word 
"also." The effect of the amendment would have been to 
elect Atchison at the joint meeting and postpone the election 
of Benton. The amendment was lost, yeas fourteen, nays 
nineteen. The resolution was then passed, yeas twenty, 
nays thirteen.^"" 

When the resolution came up in the House, Hough, a 
democrat from Scott county in Southeast Missouri, intro- 
duced a series of resolutions, the purport of which was to 
approve the course of Atchison and to condemn that of 
Benton upon the Texas question. This was an effort to delay 
the action of the House upon the Senate resolution until 
after the time named for the joint meeting, but the Speaker 
decided that as they were concurrent they should lay on the 
table one day before being considered. Mr. McHenry, of 
Bates county, offered the following resolution: "That the 
Senate be informed that the House will be ready this day 
at 2 o'clock P. M. to proceed to the election of two Senators 
to the Congress of the United States for the State of Mis- 

"Ibid. 

^"Senate Journal, 1844-45, pp. 42f. 



EARLY OPPOSITION TO THOMAS HART BENTON. 195 

souri." ^°^ Mr. Davis, a Whig from Howard county, ob- 
jected to the consideration of the resolution as being out of 
order. The Speaker decided the consideration of the resolu- 
tion to be in order, whereupon, Davis appealed from the 
decision of the Speaker to the House and demanded the yeas 
and nays. The Speaker was sustained by a vote of seventy- 
eight to sixteen. Mr. Ferryman, Whig from Washington 
county, then moved to adjourn, but the motion was lost by 
a vote of sixty to thirty-seven. Mr. Hough then moved to 
postpone the consideration of Mr. McHenry's resolution, 
until tomorrow at 2 o'clock P. M., but his motion was voted 
down fifty-five to forty-one and McHenry's resolution was 
adopted by the same vote. There were forty-four Whig 
members in the House. It will be noted that in no instance 
during the fight to delay the election of Benton did the Whigs 
cast their full vote against the Benton men. 

When the two houses met in joint session Atchison was 
nominated for the short term by Mr. Fort, leader of the 
Benton men in the Senate, and received 101 votes, thirty- 
four more than was necessary. For the long term, Mr. 
Monroe, Senator from the central part of the State, nominated 
Col. Benton; and Senator Anderson, Soft Democrat from St. 
Louis, nominated Thos. B. English, a Soft from Cape Girar- 
deau county. Benton received seventy-four votes, English 
thirty-two, and the other votes were scattered. ^"^ Benton 
had a margin of only eight votes which in itself is significant 
when it is remembered that the Democrats had eighty mem- 
bers in the legislature, and that Atchison's margin was 
thirty-four. An analysis of the vote shows that two Whigs 
voted for Benton and eight Democrats failed to vote for 
him, that most of the Anti-Ben ton Democratic vote was in 
the Senate and came from the holdover Senators and further 
that it came from the Northwest and the Southeast. 

The Anti-Benton forces, clearly, had failed to perfect 
any coalition whereby they could cast their entire vote for 
one man, and their tactics was to secure time for organiza- 

'"House Journal, 1844-45, pp. 38-40. 
"'Ibid. 



196 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 

tion. On the other hand the Democratic organization had 
succeeded in controlHng all the newly elected members except 
three. The correspondent of The Republican enumerated a 
number who cast their votes for Benton, but who, he said, 
should have voted against him. Boas, of Ste. Genevieve, 
had instructions from his constituents in his pocket to vote 
against Benton when he voted for him; Buford of Madison, 
French of Dade, McClure of Warren, McHenry of Bates, 
Salmon of Davis, Smith of Clinton, Warren of Camden, 
and Wilson of Van Buren (Bates) were either elected on pledges 
to vote against Benton or as anti-Benton men. Some of 
them, it was alleged, pledged themselves repeatedly on the 
stump to oppose Benton's reelection. ^"^ Here are nine men 
most of whom, at least, had been brought to the support of 
Col. Benton thru the pressure of the organization. Indeed 
the power of the party organization was so great that it not 
only whipped the Soft members of the Legislature into line, 
but it prevented any Soft leader of prominence from be- 
coming an active candidate against Benton or even openly 
allowing the use of his name for such a purpose. Thus it 
appears that the party organization saved Benton in 1844. 
The Hard press was jubilant. The papers praised Benton 
very highly. All open opposition seemed to melt away and 
while Benton's victory was by a very narrow margin it ap- 
peared to be complete. 

'»>S/. Louis Republican, Nov. 25, 1844. 



mw 



m 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




011 898 238 1 



I 



